Mirror Site

Please note that I have started another blog over at Wordpress.com. This is due to some strange happenings here on Blogger (losing communication, odd formatting problems, non-access to everyone's blog, unscheduled outages, etc.)

For now, this will be a mirror site, i.e., a backup to this one just in case Blogger accidentally blows away all of the posts (which has been reported by a couple of other bloggers)

The link is here and on the blogroll at the left.

Blog Comment Policy

Updated January 2007

I encourage rational discussion & comments, but not personal character assassination to make your point. If I have made a mistake, fine, point it out & we will go from there. If you agree or disagree, put it down. Add to the discussion if possible, or make your opinion known without resorting to name-calling of the author or others.

If you want to leave anonymous messages, fine, but if you want to flame the positions of the author or the other people who take the time to comment on the material presented, have the decency, courage (or as another blogging friend would put it, the cajones) to put your name/blog/address to your post.

There have also been some abuses of my good nature to sidetrack off of the main topic of the post to discuss related material. That's fine as long as it's relevant and doesn’t detract too much from the topic at hand.

But one of the things that I am beginning to be annoyed with is the incessant nitpicking over isolating one statement in a paragraph and taking it out of context.If you want to make a comment, comment on the entire post or paragraph as it suits you.Again, we’ll go from there.

Otherwise, don't be surprised if it gets blown away into itty-bitty pieces without warning. Or changed to make the comment seem even more ridiculous than what it already says. Continued abuses can and will lead to banning, but only as a last resort. For better or worse, this is my updated policy.

Coretta Scott King Funeral

I heard on the radio that various politicians and civic leaders have used the funeral for Coretta Scott King as a podium to bash President Bush, who is in attendance.

Folks, I will say it again - funerals are for remembering the life of the deceased, not to make a grandstanding political speech. This has happened when Rosa Parks died, it has happened during the funerals of fallen soldiers, and it is happening again during this sad event. These actions are totally inappropriate!!

Where is the decency of these speakers? Are they so consumed with hate that they will take each and every opportunity to spew it out? Or are they so insensitive to use these events to further their own agenda?

The more and more that I hear about these insensitive morons, the more I believe that they are not worthy of my attention, support, or votes. I wonder how many other people out there listen to these idiots and think the same thing as I do, or worse, think that this is the right time to voice their opinion.

Superbowl Recap

Well, Pittsburg won as most people thought. It wasn't an exciting game, but it was a lot closer than what I thought.

Seattle made a couple of plays near the end of the first half which didn't make sense to me, and Pittsburgh got that first touchdown on a oh-so-close call that really could have gone either way.

The commercials were average in my opinion. Those that stood out in my mind as being the favorites are:

1. The Fed-Ex commercial where the caveman was trying to send his "package".
2. The Careerbuilder.com where the guy is working for monkeys and the gal was working for donkeys.
3. The Bud Light commercial where the guy was about to be mauled by the bear, only to have his buddy steal the Bud Light (Not cool, Dave!)
4. The Budwieser commercial where the young Clydesdale started to pull the beer wagon (with some covert assistance).

Let your opinion on the game and/or the commercials be known in the comment section. Thanks!

Superbowl Predictions

Well, about 8 1/2 hours from this post, Superbowl XL will begin. What are the predictions for this game? Three out of four pundits are calling for a Pittsburg win.

I guess I'm picking Pittsburg to win, but I'm hoping it will be a close game. I still remember Bradshaw winning 4 Superbowls. The only thing that I seem to be able to associate with Seattle is the Brian Bosworth hoopla that turned into a bunch of nothing.

Anyway, if I'm wrong, so be it, and anyone reading this post can flame away! Enjoy the game.

A Nuclear Iran?

Micheal Stone has a piece on his Blog America Under Attack which is pretty interesting. It does mirror many of the same thoughts that have been posted on other sites and in the comments.

Media for Who?

The mainstream media does not have the well being of the United States in mind when they are reporting stories. In fact, some of their actions could be called treasonous. Take these examples:

The mainstream media does not have the well being of the United States in mind when they are reporting stories. In fact, some of their actions could be called treasonous. Take these examples:

During the first Gulf War, when fighters were taking off from their bases in Saudi Arabia, CNN dutifully reported their take-offs, and made statements that they would know where they were going in about 1 to 2 hours. Of course, this gave Saddam's military time to get ready, and higher losses of aircraft and crews were the result. After the conflict was over, one of the senior Iraqi generals made the statement that CNN was one of their best sources of intelligence.

Also during the same conflict, the media reported in great detail the use of laser guided bombs & missiles and their limitations. Saddam's response was to ignite the Kuwait oil fields, resulting in one of the greatest ecological disasters in the region. All to thwart those lasers.

During the hunt for Bin Laden, the media reported that our forces were closing in on Bin Laden's position. Our forces knew his position because of his use of a satellite cell phone, and were triangulating his position from that source. The day after that report aired, the phone was never used again. I wonder why?

A reported incident at the Guantonimo Bay Detention facility concerning the desecration of prisoner's Korans was reported, and a huge world wide uproar ensued. Later, it was found out that this report was false, but that note got nowhere near the attention that the original report got. One can only wonder how many people were put in danger after this untrue report.

Last and more recent example. The media reported that the FBI, NSA, and other intelligence sources were eavesdropping on known terrorist cell phones to learn of their plans and to locate the terrorist's location. Many of those phones went silent, and there was a run on the purchase of one-time and temporary cell phones that could be purchased in cash. There were reports from a couple of Wal-Mart's in Texas that 6 Middle Eastern men were apprehended when they attempted to buy 60+ of these cell phones, and were wanting to pay cash for them. It was later reported that these men were connected to al-Qaeda.

The First Article of United States Bill of Rights states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." This is a powerful liberty to allow the press (or media) uncensored freedom to publish what they want. It also carries great responsibility. For instance, during Orson Welles's broadcast of War of the Worlds, people panicked because they thought Earth was being invaded by Mars. Another example is yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater. Both have the potential for getting people hurt. So does the careless reporting of military activities and/or secure information.

While we normally think of war as being between countries, the terrorists have declared war on the United States, and have attacked our citizens & military numerous times. And we have declared war on the terrorists and any country that helps them. Does anyone doubt that this is a war? Do you remember September 11, 2001?

Article 3 Section 3 (in part) of the United States Constitution deals with the subject of Treason, and declares that "Treason against the United States, ... or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort." By this definition, the media is dangerously close, if not in fact, to committing treason against the United States. Giving the terrorists information that will aid them in avoiding detection and apprehension is definitely helping them, and hurting us. And I know that there are other laws, Federal laws, that list penalites for behavior damaging to this country and its citizens.

The problem is that the media, print and otherwise, is now an entertainment industry, not a news reporting industry. In the rush to report the latest, greatest story so that better ratings can be gained, responsible journalism has gone out the door. This lack of regard for the safety of this country and its citizens & soldiers sickens me. Where will this irresponsible behavior stop? What will it take? Personally, a good start would be the prosecution of the idiots that can clearly be linked to security breaches or actions that can be proved to have caused harm or death to United States citizens and/or military personnel. Sorry, in my book, freedom of the press should not be used as a shield for giving a self-declared enemy information of what is being done to thwart their activities.

To those journalists who take issue with the above statement, consider this scenario. You report live that the FBI is closing in on a terrorist cell in Mytown, USA, your home. Tipped off by the report, the terroists flee before they can be captured. They are spotted leaving, and a running gun battle races across the city, ending up in your neighborhood on the street you live. The terrorists break into your house to take refuge. Your wife and children are home. Rather than surrender, they scream "Allah Akbar!!" just before they detonate their last bomb, reducing your house and everyone in it to splinters and hamburger. So how would you feel? Think a responsible application of the First Amendment was in order? Or would you take comfort in the higher ratings your station just received? Think it can't happen? Go talk to the Israelis.

Nagan Again?

Saw the New Orleans Mayor Ray (There was a hurricane coming?) Nagan on the news this morning. He was answering questions from a Congressional inquiry on his actions & views on the Hurricane Katrina disaster. His answers showed that he was back-pedaling and blaming everyone and everything for the delays in getting help, not evacuating, etc...

One of his answers really struck me as odd, and definitely showed me that he hadn't a clue as to what his office really stood for and the authority & responsibility that he had to help the people of New Orleans.

He was asked why there was such a delay in issuing the order to evacuate the city. His response was that he had to check with his legal advisors to see if such an order was within the powers of his office.

Now any mayor that knows anything and has attended disaster training sessions & meetings knows that he has the authority to save the citizens of his city from disaster by issuing an evacuation order. Obviously, this yahoo(!) had no friggen idea what to do, how to do it, or if he could do it. And with a hurricane bearing down on his city, he should have known what his options were ahead of time since he had plenty of warning. What an incompetant idiot...

I wonder if Nagan will run for re-election. If he gets re-elected, then it will be a sad state of affairs for New Orleans.

Wonder how the Governor will do in these same hearings...

Hamas's True Nature

If you ever wanted to find out what Hamas is really all about, follow this link or copy the following into your browser:

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/hamas.htm

Thanks to Joe Hagarty at Civil Discussions for this one.

State of the Union Speech

Having watched the State of the Union speech last night, I now understand why Ronald Reagan was such a forward thinker in leaving the Democratic Party. This Party acted like jerks, and showed their true colors.

I understand not showing support for the President during his speech by not clapping or standing, and President Bush did slap them around verbally for their actions on a variety of critical issues. But here are the items that I really think that show that this party is acting like their mascot, the donkey.

One of the President's points called for making the tax cuts permanent. The Democrats sat there stone-faced & not moving. What do you think that they are going to do if they ever get back into power? Raise your taxes, of course.

Another point was the elimination of government agencies that were under performing, not performing, or did not add to the overall efficiency of the government. Again, the Democrats sat there stone-faced & not moving. Hmmm...they like big government.

The only time they showed life was when the President mentioned that Congress did not pass a Social Security reform. Then they jumped up, hooting & hollering & slapping each other on the back. However, the President put a cap on that noise by mentioning that the problem with Social Security still exists and needs to be fixed. Of course, the Democrats sure didn't offer any alternatives last year, and still don't have a plan to fix the system.

Of the many initiatives given by the President, the Democrats were not receptive of very many of them. Then again, they sure haven't done their part either. They want things back the way they were when they had control of Congress.

In closing, the President did state that he wanted both parties of the Congress to work together on all of the issues, foreign and domestic, to move the country forward and be prepared for the future. Do you think that this reasonable request fell on deaf ears? I do.